Battlefield 4

[crackOlicious]

So what's your thoughts on the 17 minute trailer?
Let's hear 'em.

Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2

 

[Oj0]

Battlefield 2. That is all.

 

[Pansyfaust]

Hopefully BF4 is geared towards competitive play...and a bigger focus on squad commander roles.

 

[yourang]

Graphics looks damn good!!

What i want to see in bf4.

A in game browser , no battlelog BS .(Wont happen probably , EA is douche bags)
128 player maps

 

[crackOlicious]

Hopefully BF4 is geared towards competitive play...and a bigger focus on squad commander roles.

I'm sure they wouldn't take away from the competitive side seen as bf has always been mp orientated,
But, looks like sp might have been given a little more love from this trailer.

Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2

 

[Gumpertapolloss]

Graphics looks damn good!!

What i want to see in bf4.

A in game browser , no battlelog BS .(Wont happen probably , EA is douche bags)
128 player maps

128 player maps?

Then the map must be crap big

 

[Oj0]

Battlefield 2 had it... Again, just saying.

 

[Bakerman]

1. Vehicles in the trailer are all from BF3.
2. Weapons used was from MOH.
3. Frostbite 3, uh-huh yea right.

Like OJ said. BF2.

If they decided to reboot BF2 I would be exicted, but I'm not exactly amped for another BF3 DLC, this time at $60.

 

[PancakesZA]

Def graphical improvement. Although not a huge one.
Weapon models look amazing.
Facial graphics look really good, they def did some magic with that.
The 17min vid was run on a true 7990 for those who are interested...seems like BF4 will be a gaming evolved title.

AMD FTW!!

 

[NomNom]

I honestly wish it was a 17min multiplayer trailer because the single player and multiplayer are so different in terms of graphics and gameplay also the fact that most if not all people don't buy Battlefield for the single player.

 

[Dragon]

Link please

 

[crackOlicious]

Official 17 minute Battlefield 4 Gameplay Trailer | Lazygamer .:: The Worlds Best Video Game News ::.

 

[Dragon]

Official 17 minute Battlefield 4 Gameplay Trailer | Lazygamer .:: The Worlds Best Video Game News ::.

Thanks

 

[yourang]

128 player maps?

Then the map must be crap big

In BETA of BF3 they hacked the metro map to support 128 players unofficial , so it was possible just never released.


128 players on metro would of been awesome

 

[Sarinaide]

AMD and EA Dice partnership and yes they demo'd the game on the mythical Malta. Nvidia and Intel did it for years with "NVIDIA and Runs better on Intel" so why not. Yesterdays GDC news showed a few more partnerships and drives.

 

[Sarinaide]

I want a 128 man operation metro map

Things I wanted to see;

1) 128 man maps
2) Combat scaling ie: sick of maps with 2 tanks, 1 helicopter and a jet. If military command is the objective how about scaling vehicles to the size of maps. for a 128 man map 5 heli's, 15-20 tanks, 5 Jets should allow a user more fun, you know how hard it is to get a vehicle in Armored Kill?

 

[Miz3r]

128 man metro.

Sigh more room for kids to use an m320 and spam no thank you.



Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

 

[madh4tt3r]

I am not sure if I want to support EA anymore, The game does look pretty good but I hate EA so much now days that I don't really want to play their games anymore even if it means missing a couple good games. Their decisions that they make just irritate me and I do not believe they are in it for the gamer, they are in it to line their own pockets. Creating Origin was terrible, Was happy to have all my games on steam in one central location, now I have to have it via origin as well and if you buy ubisoft games, theirs get activated through their uplay or whatever. Just drives me nuts that these companies are trying to compete here and it seperates my gaming database. The DLC that EA push out is just frustrating but anyway guess we will see how things go as I did enjoy bf3 but just dont like EA.

 

[Oj0]

In the days of Battlefield 2, maps were added by something called a patch, which was completely free.

 

[madh4tt3r]

yea it is just crazy!! I still think EA started all this DLC crap that is going around today, Think of games like the sims where they released "stuff packs" and 7000 expansion packs. They then just took that idea further and added a tiny bit of content to games for $10 a pop or whatever the price is and call it DLC and now they make a killing from it and everyone noticed that and jumped on the bandwagon.

oh well, guess gaming was bound to make some serious money at some stage in life and when your company starts making money you start getting more greedy or atleast thats the only thing I can think of. The really rich are usually quite heartless when it comes to business. As long as there are other developers out there still creating awesome games I atleast don't have to support EA.

 

[Pansyfaust]

True Oj0. I think bf3 is a great game, but do I think the additions of all the other DLC have made it better? Not really. The only worthwhile addition I think was the back to karkand maps (which did not really bring any "new" things, ONLY maps) and Armoured Kill (new vehicles and maps). The rest of it is just mediocre. As long as all the main publishers keep doing it, and people keep buying it, it wont change. Dont blame the game developers, I really think DICE have a winner in the BF franchise, but this DLC era in gaming must adapt to NOT only be about money. I mean holding back an integral part of a game (ala ME 3) so that you can DLC that extra part of story? That really rustles my jimmies...

 

[Off-The-Chart]

bring back the days of games like Black Hawk Down or Joint Operations where 128 player maps with no lag and pretty decent to good gfx was do-able on bloody dial up and no lag.

 

[crackOlicious]

Loved me some black hawk down back in the day.

Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2

 

[JollyJamma]

Could they please do something to solve the hacking issues? haven't played in ages but the thought of buying BF4 just so I can be killed at time of spawning, doesn't fill me with excitement.

 

[wizardofid]

sadly, I think you guys forget, what costs are involved in making additional maps.

What actually takes place is that they have additional staff that works on additional maps, so staffing increase = extra additional expenditure, game having evolved to the point, where it has become really complex, and maps takes a good few months to do, and play test, it has necessitated game developers, to charge for additional content, not because they greedy, but because they have to recoup some costs of the development of additional maps.

So really it is not about greed but rather a business model that has evolved that, that simply can't afford to give out free stuff any more that costs millions of dollars to create in the first place.Developing a single DLC, could quickly add up to 8 to 10 million to make.

Most developers have basically done is do away with expansions, that you could buy, remember BF2 had like 3 exp packs, they have taken that, made it online, and slashed the prices considerably compared to printed media, I really don't see what you are moaning about.

 

[sabie]

Battlefield 2. That is all.

Well there are some rumours that Commander mode will return, which is kinda cool. So here is to hope I guess.
Knowing half the internet though, it will end in tears.

"The heavily requested Commander feature will return and will allow players to direct infantry through a more strategic view of the battlefield. Commanders will also be able to support their team through the use of additional firepower and supplies, as well as through use of the UAV."

3. Frostbite 3, uh-huh yea right.

"Frostbite 3 is an improvement of Frostbite 2, debuting with Battlefield 4. It only supports DirectX 11 on PCs. It also features in-game destruction with Destruction 4.0 which upgraded from Destruction 3.0, and it features an entirely new tessellation technology."

Go read up a little. So ye it is more like Frostbite 2.5 but not exactly just FB2.

 

[Zinc]

[MENTION=146]sabie[/MENTION]

I will play this, just to get sabie's dog tags.

 

[sabie]

[MENTION=146]sabie[/MENTION]

I will play this, just to get sabie's dog tags.

Hahaha my têgs is free pappie

 

[Bakerman]

Naming the engine Frostbite 3.0 is implying that they've created a new engine, which they haven't even gotten close to. Adding tessellation and a few minor improvements to Frostbite 2 does not merit screwing the traditional DICE naming system, this should have been called Frostbite 2.5. The name Frostbite 3.0 is nothing more than a marketing ploy by EA to fool people into thinking that they've done the near impossible and created a brand new engine for the game in such a limited time window.

The rumors about the commander role returning have proven to be false, so don't get too excited for it. It would be bloody awesome if they include it in the final game, but knowing EA they probably won't.

It has been quickly brought to our attention that the following info has been deemed fake by NeoGAF mods, which falls in line with our suspicion of Battlefield 4′s alleged release date and resolution on next-generation consoles.

Battlefield 4 Rumors Suggest The Return of Commander Mode, Recording Functionality, Dynamic Weather and More [Updated] - MP1st

Do not be fooled by EA people! EA has not given DICE enough time and resources to create a true successor to Battlefield 3. If you look closely at the 17min trailer you'll notice they used models from previous DICE games and only succeeded in adding small improvements like tessellation and better mo-caps. The "new engine" is nothing to get exited about. You think it looks good? Go look at the FB2 tech demos. You think day/night cycles are new? Go look at the FB2 tech demos. Dynamic weather? FB2 tech demos.

Battlefield 4 is nothing more than a new COD is to the series in current times.

 

[crackOlicious]

^ meh, anything new looks better than cod.

Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2